I. Evidence
II. Bias
Finding information is just one step in doing research, but the hard part is often selecting which information to use. An evaluation of sources is important to making a careful selection, so that your product, whether an essay, presentation, etc., puts to use only the most effective information. When evaluating a source you need to be aware of the evidence presented and the bias of the source. Once you have found several reliable sources, you can connect the information, or triangulate, to see if your sources report similar findings and corroborate or support the findings of one another.
Below are two protocols for doing an evaluation of a source. The first, the CRAAP Test, is designed for use with digital sources like web sites. The second, Origin Purpose Value Limitation, is a method used primarily by History students evaluating print resources, but is applicable to many other subjects.
Applying the CRAAP Test to Evaluating Web Sites
When you search the Web, you’re going to find a lot of information . . . but is it accurate and reliable? You will have to determine this for yourself, and the CRAAP Test can help. The CRAAP Test is a list of questions you can ask yourself in order to determine if the information on a web site is reliable. Please keep in mind that the following list of questions is not static nor is it complete. Different criteria will be more or less important depending on your situation or need. So, what are you waiting for? Is your web site credible and useful, or is it a bunch of . . . !
Currency
The timeliness of the web page.
If relevant, when was the information gathered?
When was it posted?
When was it last revised?
Are links functional and up-to-date?
Is there evidence of newly added information or links?
Relevance/Coverage
The uniqueness of the content and its importance for your needs.
What is the depth and breadth of the information presented?
Is the information unique?
Is it available elsewhere, in print or electronic format?
Could you find the same or better information in another source?
Who is the intended audience? Is this easily determined?
Does the site provide the information you need?
Your overall assessment is important. Would you be comfortable using this source for a research paper?
Authority
The source of the web page.
Who is the author/creator/sponsor?
Are author's credentials listed?
Is the author a teacher or student of the topic?
Does the author have a reputation?
Is there contact information, such as an e-mail address?
Has the author published works in traditional formats?
Is the author affiliated with an organization?
Does this organization appear to support or sponsor the page?
What does the domain name/URL reveal about the source of the information, if anything? Example: .com .edu .gov .org .net
Accuracy
The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the informational content.
Where does the information come from?
Are the original sources of information listed?
Can you verify any of the information in independent sources or from your own knowledge?
Has the information been reviewed or refereed?
Does the language or tone seem biased?
Are there spelling, grammar, or other typos?
Purpose
The presence of bias or prejudice/The reason the web site exists.
Are possible biases clearly stated?
Is advertising content vs. informational content easily distinguishable?
Are editorials clearly labeled?
Is the purpose of the page stated?
Is the purpose to: inform? teach? entertain? enlighten? sell? persuade?
What does the domain name/URL reveal about the source of the information, if anything? Example: .com .edu .gov .org .net
*Modified version of CRAAP Test created by Meriam Library at California State University, Chico.
Applying OPVL to Evaluating Print Resources
*Produced to support students in IB History, but applicable to several other subjects.
Origin
In order to analyze a source, you must first know what it is. Sometimes not all of these questions can be answered. The more you do know about where a document is coming from, the easier it is to ascertain purpose, value and limitation.
Who created it?
Who is the author?
When was it created?
When was it published?
Where was it published?
Who is publishing it?
Is there anything we know about the author that is pertinent to our evaluation?
This last question is especially important. The more you know about the author of a document, the easier it is to answer the following questions. Knowing that George was the author of a document might mean a lot more if you know you are talking about George Washington and know that he was the first president, active in the creation of the United States, a General, etc
Purpose
This is the point where you start the real evaluation of the piece and try to figure out the purpose for its creation. You must be able to think as the author of the document. At this point you are still only focusing on the single piece of work you are evaluating.
Why does this document exist?
Why did the author create this piece of work? What is the intent?
Why did the author choose this particular format?
Who is the intended audience? Who was the author thinking would receive this?
What does the document “say”?
Can it tell you more than is on the surface?
Value
Now comes the hard part. Putting on your historian hat, you must determine: Based on who wrote it, when/where it came from and why it was created…what value does this document have as a piece of evidence? This is where you show your expertise and put the piece in context. Bring in your outside information here.
What can we tell about the author from the piece?
What can we tell about the time period from the piece?
Under what circumstances was the piece created and how does the piece reflect those circumstances?
What can we tell about any controversies from the piece?
Does the author represent a particular ‘side’ of a controversy or event?
What can we tell about the author’s perspectives from the piece?
What was going on in history at the time the piece was created and how does this piece accurately reflect it?
Limitation
The task here is not to point out weaknesses of the source, but rather to say: at what point does this source cease to be of value to us as historians? With a primary source document, having an incomplete picture of the whole is a given because the source was created by one person (or a small group of people?), naturally they will not have given every detail of the context. Do not say that the author left out information unless you have concrete proof (from another source) that they chose to leave information out. Also, it is obvious that the author did not have prior knowledge of events that came after the creation of the document. Do not state that the document “does not explain X” (if X happened later).
Being biased does not limit the value of a source! If you are going to comment on the bias of a document, you must go into detail. Who is it biased towards? Who is it biased against? What part of a story does it leave out? What part of the story is MISSING because of parts left out?
What part of the story can we NOT tell from this document?
How could we verify the content of the piece?
Does this piece inaccurately reflect anything about the time period?
What does the author leave out and why does he/she leave it out (if you know)?
What is purposely not addressed?
OPVL Source Types
Miller, Sean. How to Write OPVL. N.p.: n.p., n.d. DOC.
Wittig, Kurt. Applying the CRAAP Test to Evaluating Web Sites. N.p.: n.p., n.d. PDF.